The Magazine

UK Government: Ex-Gay Therapy Not Beneficial, May Harm Clients

The UK’s Minister of State for Care Services has told Parliament the British government does not condone the idea of a “gay cure.”

Asked for the government’s official position on the practise of therapy to change sexual orientation, Norman Lamb, a Liberal Democrat health minister in the UK’s Conservative-Liberal coalition, replied:

The Department of Health does not condone the concept of therapists offering ‘cures’ for homosexuality. There is no evidence that this sort of treatment is beneficial and indeed it may well cause significant harm, to some patients.

It is incumbent on professionals working in the National Health Service to ensure that treatment and care, including therapy, is provided to every patient without any form of discrimination. … If someone is suffering a mental health problem, clinicians will try to help patients with whatever is causing them distress. This could involve helping someone come to terms with their sexuality, family arguments over their sexuality, or hostility from other people.

We know from research that the incidence of depression, anxiety and suicide within the gay community is significantly higher than within the heterosexual community and this is why ‘No health without mental health’ identifies lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people as a specific group for whom a tailored approach to their mental health is necessary.

British-Canadian freelance writer, editor and creative with an interest in religion, LGBT issues, arts, film and horror. Editor of Prescot Online. Occasional contributor to The Guardian's Comment is free.

4 Comments

I’ve brought up the Clark doll study that examined black children living under Jim Crow and it’s collective effect on the psyches of developing young minds. A few decades ago, other research examined the lasting effects of systemic isolation and bigotry to be GENERATIONAL when the social and economic standards of living caused stagnation in social advancement.

It cannot nor should not be excluded, what damage is done by living with chronic prejudice and the exhausting aspect of justifying one’s humanity, and existence. Most people don’t think of these things because they aren’t graphic. Religious influence on young gay people has years of effect ALREADY before any such therapy is employed. And the conflict that’s most damaging, is knowing you’re a good person who has no ill, nor has harmed anyone. But the messaging is you’re threatening or WILL have inevitable things happen to you because you’re an inferior person from the outset.
This is an obvious contradiction in reality, and extremely HURTFUL when your character is attacked in that way.
This is subtle torment, but no less damaging than any other mental and emotional abuse.
By law, by moral reasoning, if torment is a part of the expected result, it’s illegitimate. Which is why it’s infuriating when the arrogant dissenters point to repression of homosexuality as an accomplishment that is possible and desirable.
HOW that result happened, means nothing and isn’t acknowledged as tainted.

It is astounding how much denial, compartmentalizing and indifference there is to exposing gay young people to this and calling it more desirable for that gay person.
So arrogant and mean, it IS delusional to say it’s out of compassion.

Religious influence on young gay people has years of effect ALREADY before any such therapy is employed.

Thank you, Regan, for drawing attention to that very important point. Therein lies the serious danger of “conversion therapy”: it reinforces, consolidates and adds to any damage that has already been done, making it even more difficult to repair.

Regan: thank you for mentioning the Clark Doll experiments. I was not aware of them, and just now reviewed the literature and some videos. I am amazed.

Now, I have an additional frame of reference why I simply ‘had’ to leave the last church, as I found my own opinion of myself was degrading. I was beginning to internalize their negative view of transsexualism.

Thank you for sharing. Much love in Christ always and unconditionally; Caryn

There is such a difference here in response, than what I get from Matt Moore’s site. I don’t especially like to constantly talk about God as any motive for what I do. It’s not necessary. I’ve noticed that on anti gay sites and in comment threads, there is a form of accusatory attitudes that discussing equality, or putting forth information on legal matters is mocking God or disrespectful of believers, God and Christ.
No one has to say anything like that, for some people to believe it. It’s an extreme stretch to be victims, when no one is doing so.
It’s very difficult not to be put on the defensive when someone treats you like that and inappropriately injects religion into a LEGAL discussion about civil policies.

Why should anyone be told which God to believe in and in what way? How is THAT an example of respect?
I have been honest, sometimes in saying that I love God, don’t fear God and where I think God is.
It falls on deaf ears. As if there is some initiate purpose of SPECIFIC rules that are required to love God and PROVE I’m the right kind of believer.
I’d love to respect a person and their faith, but getting beat down with it, isn’t supposed to be the way to go, right?
I think I can pick up on when someone is sincere, and when they are being patronizing.
Once the anti gay bell has been rung, there isn’t much that can be redeemed by way of meaning it when someone says they are so sorry for me that I’ve ‘turned away from God’.
This after I’ve said that I’ve seen God in the photos coming from the Hubble and the macro photography of grains of sand.
In the smiles of children and dewy mornings.
And when I get a heartfelt hug.
I guess what my problem is. I know that’s enough for God, why can’t it be enough for another mortal like myself?